No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 October 2015
A marked impression gained when one reviews the developmental literature with a view to decidina what knowledge might be relevant to education is the large number of single issue and unconnected theories and the apparently frequent overturning of theories. At least every ten years we witness a major change in the basic theories guiding research and development in both developmental and educational psychology.
Witnessing this heavy turn-over from a sideline, one might be excused for feeling concerned that the fabric of psychological knowledge may not be able to withstand the hard wear and tear resulting from this continuous reworking and recycling, and that the psychological fabric will become more and more fragile. Some threadbare parts have become obvious already. For example, the terms cognitionand cognitive are of quite limited usefulness now because their meaning has been reduced to something internal, something that is not directly observable. Initially the concept of cognition had a general but clear meaning. Concepts such as schema, stage, behaviour, and action are beginning to suffer a similar fate.